Who is the enemy of democracy in Venezuela?

The international offensive against Nicolás Maduro, led by the White House, is about as committed to freedom as a pack of hyenas is to preserving zebras.

With his eye on Venezuela's natural resources, especially its oil, and determined to regain prominence in Latin America in the face of the Russian-Chinese coalition, Donald Trump is betting on destabilizing, besieging, and overthrowing a sovereign government.

He invented an "interim president," Congressman Juan Guaidó, who was installed in the position through self-proclamation and sworn in outside of any institutional framework. President of the National Assembly, elected in 2015 without receiving a single popular vote to assume command of the Executive Branch, the parliamentarian defies the Supreme Court and supports its attempt on foreign powers.

Such an operation is unequivocally a coup d'état. The immediate objective is to draw in the Armed Forces. Should this attempt fail, as seems to be the case, the alternative would be to organize paramilitary groups and create a climate of civil war so that the "interim" leaders can call for external military assistance.

This breaks with the principle of self-determination of peoples, a fundamental principle of international law and the Charter of the United Nations, according to which all countries renounce the use of force to overthrow or establish governments in other nations.

The starting point of this stratagem lies in one of the biggest informational frauds on record. It was spread, with the help of much of the world's press, that Maduro's re-election was arbitrary and that, therefore, his current mandate had been usurped.

The current president, re-elected by popular vote on May 20th of last year, won 67,8% of the vote, with a turnout of 46% of registered voters. He ran against two opposition candidates: Henri Falcón, with 20,9% of the vote, and Javier Bertucci, who obtained 10,8%.

For comparison, Sebastian Piñera (Chile) was elected with 54,7% of the vote and a turnout of 49% of registered voters, while Trump himself obtained 46,1% of the vote from an electoral college where 63% of those registered turned out.

Opposition sectors boycotted the election. But no concrete and formal accusations of fraud were presented. The main complaint: some prominent opposition figures were barred from running for office and some were even imprisoned.

Indeed, right-wing leaders have been convicted of inciting or resorting to violence, as well as corruption. Similarly, Catalan separatists, who peacefully attempted secession from the Kingdom of Spain, are imprisoned and awaiting trial, but are accused of violating the Constitution.

These are fundamental records for understanding that a democratic solution will only be possible if the US and its allies renounce intervention and coup attempts, accepting the dialogue table proposed by Mexico and Uruguay, which already has the acquiescence of the Venezuelan government.

Proposing new elections without halting the ongoing coup and restoring both constitutional and diplomatic normalcy, far from being a peaceful solution, strengthens those seeking to seize power by force.

Venezuela faces dramatic problems, largely caused by long-standing economic sabotage. The most serious and immediate of these dilemmas, however, is the threat to its sovereignty and its Constitution, sponsored by the United States and governments that pay homage to it.

Article published in FSP, edition of February 2nd, 2019, answering the question "Should Venezuela bring forward the holding of new elections?"